In response to recent controversy over the empirical and conceptual viability of the state-trait distinction, the conceptual bases of the distinction are explicated, with the conclusion that the distinction, though more complex than previously appreciated, is conceptually viable. Rather than attempting to reduce the state-trait distinction to a single dimension, I propose four overlapping but distinct dimensions as underlying current professional uses of the distinction: duration, continuous versus reactive manifestation, concreteness versus abstractness, and situational causality versus personal causality. Parallels are drawn between these dimensions and aspects of the broader concepts of occurrence and disposition, and the concepts of state and trait are described as applications in psychology of these broader concepts. It is argued that a clearer understanding of the concepts of state and trait will facilitate theory and research. Allen and Potkay (1981) mounted an attack on the state-trait distinction, alleging that it is "arbitrary" in practice and in principle. Zuckerman (1983) defended the distinction, reiterating criteria he had earlier proposed (Zuckerman, 1976) for the empirical discrimination of state and trait scales and providing evidence that some currently available scales meet these criteria. This article, too, is prompted by the Allen and Potkay argument, but is in a conceptual rather than an empirical vein. The position taken here is that if by "arbitrary" Allen and Potkay mean that state and trait cannot in principle be consistently distinguished, they are mistaken; on the contrary, psychologists and lay persons alike are able to make this distinction clearly, usefully, and reasonably consistently.In this article, I address only conceptual definition and clarification; the argument is only that it is possible to give a consistent interpretation to the concepts of state and trait and to distinguish clearly between them. No empirical argument is made for the actual existence of entities corresponding to these concepts or for the explanatory value of such entities (cf. Hogan, DeSoto, & Solano, 1977). Nor are the methodological issues involved in demonstrating the existence of states or traits (e.g., Epstein, 1979Epstein, , 1980 addressed. Of course, if no psychologists believed that states or traits exist, that they have explanatory value, or that they are possible to identify empirically, then a consistent conceptual understanding of the terms would be of little or no interest. Definitions of unicorns or phlogiston, no matter how clear, are of no current scientific importance. However, it is evident that the concepts of state and trait, though challenged (W. Mischel, 1968), continue to be widely used in the psychological literature, and to be of interest even to those who challenge them (e.g., W. Mischel & Peake, 1982).I thank James R. Averill for his indispensible assistance in the development of this article. I also thank Mary L. Haake for contributions to the development and writing, and W. Do...
Pathological mourning is such an excessive, blocked, or distorted process that psychiatric signs and symptoms develop. Explanation of how and why these signs and symptoms form could deepen an understanding of both normal and pathological mourning. Because many variables are involved in such explanations, intensive case study is a desirable methodology because it permits a detailed look at how various factors interact (Brewer and Hunter 1989; Luborsky and Mintz 1972; Luborsky and Spence 1971; Nessleroade and Ford 1985). While a patient may complain of symptoms as experiences that endure or occur episodically over days and weeks, a clinician observes psychiatric signs in the here-and-now seconds and minutes of an interview. Relating signs and symptoms to each other and to other variables in order to form a theoretical model of their formation requires exploration of data across long and short time frames. It is important to understand how the here-and-now phenomena combine to form patterns across longer periods of the individual's life. Hence, we developed a combined macro- and microanalytic approach to intensive case studies.
This study was designed to bring together quantitative and clinical methods to describe schematized views of self. A hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted on a single subject's ratings of self in nine contexts. Descriptors had been generated by the subject (seen in therapy for social phobia) in dream reports, interviews, and projective test responses. The four-cluster solution revealed that her self-views were similar with her husband and the therapist (actual self), with her father and her close friend (desired self), and with her mother and when she is at the center of attention. The undesired self formed a separate cluster. Evidence for the solution's validity was obtained through subject ratings on a modified version of the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior. Clinical elaboration of the schemas was obtained through case material. Convergent information was interpreted in terms of the subject's interpersonal patterns and her phobia.Although early work on the self-concept was based on the assumption that individuals possess a single concept of themselves, it has now become widely accepted that self-schemas (i.e., organized views of self) should be considered multifaceted and dynamic. Different self-schemas may be activated in different contexts, with particular schemas being quite stable with respect to a given class of situations or relationships (cf
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.